The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1887-02-23
From One of the unthInkIng.

ly; at will be well for the signers OF the re-
monstrance against woman suffrage to con-
slider what the question is on which the legis-
lature is to yotei" am but one of those re-
monstrants but have no hesitation in say
ing that they have considered. 1t is singu-
lar fact that the advocates of woman suf-
frage invariably consider that nobody "con-
siders' but themselves.
Then the PRESS cautions women against
handling lightly question which Mr. Hoar
Mr.. Reed and others have already consider
ed'' and favored. Must they necessarily
take more intelligent and more, disinterest-
ed view of it than women who have as yet
no political ambitiOnSp
In the same issue of the PRESS ID" argues
substantially as follows: 1.-The Senate too
gaHantP too good naturedP But they should
not have been. But We shall see next
Wednesday and we shall mark as a people
the men who reconsider thar vote, " so put
ting i niain, 70 the Senate tnat It Is well to
righting any mistake that may have been
one argument used before the legislative
committee was that If the right to vote can
but be obtained those women who do not
want to vote will then be obliged to do So in
order to counterfeit the ignorant vote" Yet
''D'' says frankly and prettily, IF these re-
monstrants do not believe in the justice of
such action, they do right not to approve of
Why WI say anything about ita Why Withhold Ii
from others merely what they do not desire
for themselves ?" Now, why should NOT
those who differ from the suffragists be
allowed to speak without reproach? Shall
they believe thing to be absolutely wrong
as well as unwise, and not mention it ''mere-
ly because" somebody else wants to do that
thing? 1t Is too important to women for
them to b.. silent upon it. Why is not this a
question Of majority and minority9 If the
majority, of women wish to vote, let them do
so. Ii the majority of women do not wish
to vote, let them say so. |, as one remon-
strant, am quite as willing to be oppressed
by men as to be oppressed after this fashion
by women. The experience of your CORE
argument that because some do not wish the
privilege others who do should be deprived
of it, Is not new. A majority always de-
prives the minority of something
and this is especially true of politics.
Is there any case on. record in which
majority gave up its point lest 1t should hurt
the feelings of the minority or interfere with
its rights and privileges? If the suffragists
are so sensitive to an expression of feeling,
It seems to me that they won't find the pc
heard of an ''arena" with the fghing all on
one side? And it seems to me that this sug-
gestion that it is right not to approve of 1t
but selfish to speak of our disapproval does
not come with good grace from those who
have already stated to the legislative COM
mittee that there is way to oblige women
to vote whether they wish to or not If the
Will OF the majority can be fairly ascertained
to be in favor of the ballot, no doubt remon-
strants everywhere win be willing to abide
by it. AT all events they will not calmly ask
the majority to keep silence merely be-
cause" that majority desires what they do
not.
One of the PRESS correspondents says that
in the exercise Of justice"-meaning, Of
course. the ballot and the caucus-woman's
influence in every high and holy direction
Will be strengthened" AlasI it Is true that
the human heart is weak and prene to evil
without distinction Of SEX"
Women are eminently fitted to work on
boards of education, school committees, pub
lie charities, prison boards, &c. They do
| vast work already in some of these direc-
tions But why cry out for vote? Why
| not get women on school boards and prison
| boards and keep them out of caucuses? Are
not men as ready to help women in matters
OF public charity and public. reform as they
| are to help other men? And all the Suffra-
| gists ask Is Justice! Today if women urge
any moral reform, they are believed to be
honest. Their motives are literally above
suspicion. When women are once in politics
this one source of pure, disinterested infu-
ence is removed. They will be liable to the
same suspicious, the same ambitions, the
same intrigues as men-the trail of the politi-
/
Why add to the ignorant men who already
| vote in Portlapd-who do not known, for in
stance why this 22nd of February is yearly
| given over to fish horns and tar buckets, who
can not, In too many cases, read or write
al the equally ignorant women in Portland
1t might be Just" but will two pieces of in
| justice added together make one piece of
"justicep". Would this help the
cause Of public charityP or re-
In this city of Portland. on this ed Of Feb
I ruary, how many more men than women are
engaged in the hiding of beer? viii these
| women, who in large cities far outnumber the
educated, really thoughtful women, elevate
| One more question. and please understand
that my interrogation points are not rhetori-
cal. Iwish to be informed. wish to ''think.
l have thought that was thinking of this
neesttbIO ZION for nearly twenty years but now
pleasure of seeing Susan B. Anthony liter.
| ally chase DR.. Mary Walker off the stage at
woman suffrage meeting in Washington.
have had the pleasure of hearing all but two
of the leading speakers in the United States
in favor of women's rights. But / get NO
light on women's wrongs. l know that wo.
men OF small property are not taxed, and
understand this to be by courtesy, since men
have the right to tax us; know that while
husbands are compelled to support Their
| wives, wives, even when rich, are exempted
from supporting worthless husbands. know
that poor men are liable for the debts of theii
extravagant wives and that rich wives are
not liable for the debts of their INDECENT hus-
bands. But do not understand the injus-
tice to women in this. How is the ballot to
help women who smart under these wrongs
Win d., or somebody else tell me three
| points in which women of property are
| wronged under the laws of Maine. which
are not more than counterbalanced by dis
elimination in their favor? Il know all
about the wrongs of women of no property. i
And if the women of property are So
wronged, why is it that SO many women OF
| property sign circumstances whenever re-
monstrances are made2 Surely they are not
all .'unthinkingp'
These things are to me unthinkable. But
am open to conviction and only ask that
may be enlightened gently though firmly and
| that may not be told to consider. MY sin.
herent sense of justice" demands not the bal
lot, but the right to speak against what |
most detest even though somebody wishes |
would be quiet and allow her to talk. II
| seems to me that the suffragists should not
treat me with contempt If only because to do
| SO argues against their future usefulness in
the political arena" Let them rather
elevate" me if they can.
do assure you l have considered.
MARY S. CAswELL.